Green Jobs!

[AzCat]

$20,000,000.00 to "weatherize homes of the poor" will get you 14 bureaucrats and rennovations at a health club!

On the bright side $200,000,000.00+ in stimulus funds plus a large investment by the state government will at least generate some high-paying jobs for bankruptcy lawyers (and of course Chinese peasants since they'll be operating what's left).

                                            

[fatty fat fat]

green jobs look good. that's why everyone does them. and that's part of the free market.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

What a strange article.

So the worst time to spend stimulus money is during a recession when there are thousands of unemployed construction workers to  employ? Weird.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I'm not sure you understand how government grants work.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I'm not sure you understand how government grants work.

Sounds like they have the money but there is too much bureaucracy and red tape. 

[Rage Against the McKee]

I'm not sure you understand how government grants work.

Sounds like they have the money but there is too much bureaucracy and red tape. 

The government awarded the city money to subsidize 2000 retrofits. The people in the city either cannot afford or do not want the retrofits. The city still has until 2013 to complete the retrofits, or they have to give the money back to the US Government. This just demonstrates poor leadership at the local level for greatly overestimating the demand for the retrofits. It also shows poor judgement on the government agency who awarded the grant, most likely the DOE. In the end, though, this isn't a big deal at all. The city will either perform the retrofits, or the government will have spent slightly less money on the ARRA.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I'm not sure you understand how government grants work.

Sounds like they have the money but there is too much bureaucracy and red tape. 

The government awarded the city money to subsidize 2000 retrofits. The people in the city either cannot afford or do not want the retrofits. The city still has until 2013 to complete the retrofits, or they have to give the money back to the US Government. This just demonstrates poor leadership at the local level for greatly overestimating the demand for the retrofits. It also shows poor judgement on the government agency who awarded the grant, most likely the DOE. In the end, though, this isn't a big deal at all. The city will either perform the retrofits, or the government will have spent slightly less money on the ARRA.

When you can't even give away free insulation, caulk, windows, and the labor to go with it, there is a problem with the application process.

Now Obama is talking again about building roads, bridges, and other infrastructure, to get people working again as the cornerstone of his campaign. From my observations, it takes several years for a project like a new road or bridge to navigate the environmental and archeological mitigation studies, let alone the nimbby's.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I'm not sure you understand how government grants work.

Sounds like they have the money but there is too much bureaucracy and red tape. 

The government awarded the city money to subsidize 2000 retrofits. The people in the city either cannot afford or do not want the retrofits. The city still has until 2013 to complete the retrofits, or they have to give the money back to the US Government. This just demonstrates poor leadership at the local level for greatly overestimating the demand for the retrofits. It also shows poor judgement on the government agency who awarded the grant, most likely the DOE. In the end, though, this isn't a big deal at all. The city will either perform the retrofits, or the government will have spent slightly less money on the ARRA.

When you can't even give away free insulation, caulk, windows, and the labor to go with it, there is a problem with the application process.

Now Obama is talking again about building roads, bridges, and other infrastructure, to get people working again as the cornerstone of his campaign. From my observations, it takes several years for a project like a new road or bridge to navigate the environmental and archeological mitigation studies, let alone the nimbby's.

Except it's not free. It's just subsidized. Most grants require a cash match. Roads, bridges, and other infrastructure do not require consumers, so those projects will be far easier to implement. Also, DOT's nationwide have many projects that they have already completed all of the design and environmental work on, but no longer have the budget to fund construction.

I don't support federal funding for state roads at all, but to say that the funding will not help state DOT's because of red tape is ridiculous.

[AzCat]

Except it's not free. It's just subsidized. Most grants require a cash match. Roads, bridges, and other infrastructure do not require consumers, so those projects will be far easier to implement. Also, DOT's nationwide have many projects that they have already completed all of the design and environmental work on, but no longer have the budget to fund construction.

I don't support federal funding for state roads at all, but to say that the funding will not help state DOT's because of red tape is ridiculous.

There's not only correlation there but also a causal relationship.  See if you can't puzzle it out.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Except it's not free. It's just subsidized. Most grants require a cash match. Roads, bridges, and other infrastructure do not require consumers, so those projects will be far easier to implement. Also, DOT's nationwide have many projects that they have already completed all of the design and environmental work on, but no longer have the budget to fund construction.

I don't support federal funding for state roads at all, but to say that the funding will not help state DOT's because of red tape is ridiculous.

There's not only correlation there but also a causal relationship.  See if you can't puzzle it out.

LOL if you actually believe that states cannot fund roads because they have to design with the environment in mind.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

green jobs look good. that's why everyone does them. and that's part of the free market.

This needs to be the Birther Pit motto.  It's perfect, three succinct sentences strung together with the intent of creating a complete thought, however the thought is, in reality, incoherent and nonsensical. 

It's like a stream of consciousness combined with liberal turrets. 

Liberal swear words: "jobs" and "free market"   

[michigancat]

should have spent it on somewhere it wouldn't have been wasted, like the department of defense.

[AzCat]

LOL if you actually believe that states cannot fund roads because they have to design with the environment in mind.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying but I'm only saying it because it's a self-evident truth. 

For example: Suppose the State of Acme has $X to spend on infrastructure.  Of that $X it is necessary to devote $Y to environmental studies, compliance with federal environmental laws, defense of actions by environmental groups granted third party standing to bring suit by the federal government, etc.  Thus the amount actually available to build or improve infrastructure is not $X but the lesser amount $X - $Y.

We're desperately in need of a reversion to more rational times when the level of environmental, cultural & racial sensitivity was at a more reasonable level.  Say like the days when one of the US oil majors employed a chief geologist who was fond of drilling for oil in Indian burial grounds.  That seems like a nice balance. 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Liberal rag agrees Green Jobs is a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) idea

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/19/us/19bcgreen.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=green%20jobs&st=cse

Our President is a rough ridin' dipshit 

[Rage Against the McKee]

LOL if you actually believe that states cannot fund roads because they have to design with the environment in mind.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying but I'm only saying it because it's a self-evident truth. 

For example: Suppose the State of Acme has $X to spend on infrastructure.  Of that $X it is necessary to devote $Y to environmental studies, compliance with federal environmental laws, defense of actions by environmental groups granted third party standing to bring suit by the federal government, etc.  Thus the amount actually available to build or improve infrastructure is not $X but the lesser amount $X - $Y.

We're desperately in need of a reversion to more rational times when the level of environmental, cultural & racial sensitivity was at a more reasonable level.  Say like the days when one of the US oil majors employed a chief geologist who was fond of drilling for oil in Indian burial grounds.  That seems like a nice balance. 

The amount of environmental planning that goes into road design is very minimal. State DOT's don't have the money to construct projects they have already designed because of reduced revenues and the incredibly high cost of building a highway.

Environmental planning saves the government money in the long run, just so you know. Believe what you want, though.